image_adjust

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden but discloses nothing: it doesn't say whether the change is reversible, whether it requires the image to be selected, whether it mutates the underlying asset, or how the two required index parameters relate to the operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence is appropriately sized, but the trailing '(etc.)' is vague filler that adds no information and hints at undocumented properties.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a mutation tool with zero annotations, no output schema, and five parameters (two required) at 20% coverage, the description is inadequate; an agent cannot determine targeting rules, permitted values, or the effect of the operation from it.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 20% (only document_id is described). The description names brightness and contrast, which merely restates schema property names, and says nothing about the required pageIndex/itemIndex or their targeting semantics, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Adjust) and resource (image properties) with example properties. It is distinguishable from siblings like image_fit or image_place, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from effects tools such as effect_applyTransparency that also alter image appearance.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as image_fit, effect_applyDropShadow, or transform tools. No prerequisites, no context for selecting it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.